SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Apple and John Deere Shareholder Resolutions Demand They Explain Their Bad Repair Policies - iFixit:
Apple and John Deere, primary antagonists of the Right to Repair movement, may soon have to explain their domineering repair programs to one of their most demanding audiences: their shareholders.
U.S. PIRG, working with its affiliated socially responsible mutual fund company, Green Century Funds, has filed shareholder resolutions with both Apple and John Deere, asking them to account for “anti-competitive repair policies." Both resolutions admonish the companies for fighting independent repair and ignoring the broad political shift toward Right to Repair laws.
Touch ID stops working if you replace the fingerprint sensor on your iPhone. This used to brick iPhones; now it’s just the sad reality of iPhone repair.
Green Century’s Apple resolution says that the company “risks losing its reputation as a climate leader if it does not cease its anti-repair practices.” Noting that internet-connected devices will account for 14% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, Green Century’s resolution demands the company reverse course to “mitigate regulatory and reputational risks and bolster the company's ambitious climate commitments.”
[...] The John Deere resolution calls out the company’s broken promise to make crucial repair software available to farmers. "Company representatives are quick to point out that less than 2% of all repairs require a software update," Green Capital Funds notes. "However, Deere does not disclose what percentage of the repair sales the 2% represents."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by stormwyrm on Thursday September 16 2021, @07:39AM (4 children)
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 16 2021, @12:30PM (2 children)
Interesting that you mention emissions with repair.
One of the fav arguments for preventing owner repair is that the result might violate some emissions standard.
Perhaps the first thing to do would be to make sure that the emissions rules don't make the right to repair worse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 16 2021, @05:49PM (1 child)
The emissions standard objection is just an excuse, and if it didn't exist they'd pick something else. People who care about their equipment enough to want to learn how to fix it themselves tend to care about it enough to want to fix it properly. The other beneficiaries of Right to Repair are people who want to hire non-dealer service companies, who are held to the same regulations and certification requirements as the dealers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 16 2021, @09:05PM
It may just be an excuse but its an excuse that is being actively exploited by the EPA in litigation against individuals who build race cars. Not exactly right to repair, but rather right to modify. In the last few years the EPA has started to enforce rules that basically say any car with a VIN number or any engine that was in a car with a VIN cannot be modified in any way (since any performance modifications will change its emissions), regardless of their intended use as race-only vehicles.
The EPA is going after racers now but I guarantee it wont stop there. What if I have an old car from the 90's and the computer dies on it. The manufacturer doesn't make the computer anymore and say for sake of argument I can't find one at the local junk yard. It would be easy to find an aftermarket computer and replace the broken one but that is illegal according to the EPA. Even if you were to test the car and ensure its emissions are fine, the very act of replacing a part of the emission system with an aftermarket part is illegal as far as the EPA is concerned. And thats how this game goes. They shoehorn their way in with an angle not many people will fight (aftermarket racing components) and slowly metastasize to adjacent areas that will eventually effect you and me.
This was a long way of saying that you can ignore objections that seem arbitrary at your own peril. We need broad-scope right to repair laws or we will be doomed to subservience and a disposable lifestyle.
(Score: 2) by Rich on Friday September 17 2021, @12:08PM
Fun fact: Years ago, I bought a little English sports car that was re-imported to Germany from Italy. Italy was late with introducing catalysts, and must have some weird EU exemptions. The car was built in 1991 and had no cat when it went to Italy. Yet I got my German papers with a cat type class, because the local regulations didn't assume any car from 1991 could be without cat. I have actual paperwork that says "Typklasse 01, 3.5% CO" for the emissions test.
Anyway, because I wanted optimum mixture/economy, I had the oxygen sensor fitted (it was literally screw-in, plug-in, all the cables were laid) and replaced the ECU software with one that recognizes the oxygen sensor. The joys of pluggable EPROMs. And because I'm such a tree hugger, I also had an actual catalyst fitted as well. Cost me a few horse, and the neat exhaust note.
Most of the time you'll find it the other way 'round, though, and people replace the catalyst with a straight-thru pipe. Now if manufacturers actually were concerned about such stuff happening, they would have long chipped the cat.